The Administration strongly opposes H.R. 2560, the “Cut, Cap and Balance Act of 2011.” Neither setting arbitrary spending levels nor amending the Constitution is necessary to restore fiscal responsibility. Increasing the Federal debt limit, which is needed to avoid a Federal government default on its obligations and a severe blow to the economy, should not be conditioned on taking these actions. Instead of pursuing an empty political statement and unrealistic policy goals, it is necessary to move beyond politics as usual and find bipartisan common ground.

The bill would undercut the Federal Government’s ability to meet its core commitments to seniors, middle-class families and the most vulnerable, while reducing our ability to invest in our future. H. R. 2560 would set unrealistic spending caps that could result in significant cuts to education, research and development, and other programs critical to growing our economy and winning the future. It could also lead to severe cuts in Medicare and Social Security, which are growing to accommodate the retirement of the baby boomers, and put at risk the retirement security for tens of millions of Americans.

***

Related: The latest on the headache-inducing McConnell sellout from RedState:

Only in Washington are spending increases called spending cuts. They will actually grow discretionary spending at 2/3 rate of inflation (spending increase) but call it $1 trillion in cuts below the baseline of full inflation. About $200 billion come from cuts to health care providers, something we stop every year with the doc fix — not sure how they’ll keep this promise. And another $165 billion come from increases in government fees (some call tax increases), not spending cuts. So at the end of the day, we are left with a $2 billion FY2012 cut, and $55 billion in promised actual spending cuts through yet unspecified policy changes. A whopping $57 billion in cuts over a decade, or less than $6 billion a year.